SavedByGrace
Well-Known Member
If I understand, your view is "one and only" best translates the three Luke usages of monogenes?
the best for the passages in question
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
If I understand, your view is "one and only" best translates the three Luke usages of monogenes?
Lets take a look at how the NIV renders "mono" (G3441) which means "alone" and thus carries the idea of being the only one being discussed. Many times it is rendered correctly as "alone" and at other times it should be rendered alone, but other English words seem to be used arbitrarily. This is the Greek word SavedByGrace indicated would have been used by Luke if he had wanted to say "only." However, Luke seems to use "mono" to mean "alone."
Thus in Luke 6:4, where the NIV goes with "lawful only for priests" a more consistent rendering would be "lawful for priests alone."
In Luke 9:18 instead of "praying in private" the NIV should go with "praying alone."
In Luke 10:40 "doing the work by myself" the NIV should go with "doing the work alone."
In Luke 24:12 "strips of linen lying by themselves" should read "linen wrappings alone."
In Luke 24:18 "are you the only one visiting" should read "are you alone visiting."
Acts of the Apostles 11:19, "spreading the word only among Jews" should read "spreading the word to Jews alone."
It is really not that hard to translate word or phrase meanings more consistently than does the NIV. For example in Luke's writings, the NIV goes with alone 3 of the 9 times it translates mono, but the NASB sticks with alone 7 out of the 9 times. On the other hand I did not find any translation that went with "alone" all 9 times.
Yes all translations can be improved, but our efforts should focus on the most widely used versions, fixing a version few use fails the good steward test. Obviously the NIV fails with regard to its claimed "transparency." But it scores well on the Dynamic Non-Equivalence test.the NIV is a paraphrase! not all versions use the corrects words in English, not even the KJV!
μονογενής, in my opinion, has a more deeper meaning than the simple μονος, and corresponds to the Hebrew יָחִיד. A good example can be found in Judges 11:34, where Jephthah's daughter comes to meet him, "with timbrels and with dances, and she was יָחִיד (μονογενής), beside her he had neither son or daughter". The Hebrew יָחִיד , has the meaning of, "only one, hence that which is most dear, that which cannot be replaced" (Gesenius, Hebrew Lexicon). And the BDB Hebrew lexicon says, "as the one unique and priceless possession which can never be replaced".
In Hebrews 11:17, it says, "By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only μονογενής". Referring to the account in Genesis 22, where we read, "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of". Although the Hebrew here for "only" is the same as that of Judges, יָחִיד , the LXX does not use μονογενής, but αγαπητον, which is "beloved". However, I noticed in the Greek Version of the OT by Aquila, that he uses, μονογενής. In verse 16, The Angel of the Lord, Jesus Christ, says to Abraham, "And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only (αγαπητον)". The use of μονογενής with the passage in Genesis in mind, no doubt bears the meaning of "beloved", which the LXX I think rightly renders the Hebrew יָחִיד by αγαπητον
Just some thoughts. Hope that it make some sense
I do not think we should pour "love" into monogenes
Well we can certainly agree to disagree. All the best.it depends on usage. I can see no problem in attaching "beloved" to the term when used of Jesus Christ, as it is used with Abraham and Isaac. In John 1:14-18, it is used in a sense of a really close personal relationship between Jesus and the Father, which no doubt is a very, deep loving relationship.
Well we can certainly agree to disagree amicably!it depends on usage. I can see no problem in attaching "beloved" to the term when used of Jesus Christ, as it is used with Abraham and Isaac. In John 1:14-18, it is used in a sense of a really close personal relationship between Jesus and the Father, which no doubt is a very, deep loving relationship.
Well we can certainly agree to disagree amicably!
Just because monogenes was used in the LXX translate one or perhaps two the meanings of the Hebrew H3173, does mean it has the third meaning "cherished one". Thayer's and Strong's does not include the "beloved one" among the historical meanings. Perhaps your view is supported by BGAD or other lexicon you have?
Yes, I understood your argument, but disagree. And apparently no Lexicon supports the"beloved one"as within the historical range of meanings of monogenes. I thought about your argument and concluded the Hebrews author use monogenes to reflect the "one and only" meaning of H3173.In Hebrews it says, "By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only (μονογενής) son" (11:17). This, as I have said before, in referring to Genesis 22, where Abraham is told to “Take your son, your only (αγαπητον, Aquila's Greek OT reads μονογενής here) son Isaac, whom you love" (verse 2), and verse 16. It seems clear to be, that Paul in Hebrews, takes μονογενής, as equivalent in meaning, in this instance, to αγαπητον, which has the meaning "beloved". In John 1:18, we read of Jesus and The Father, "No one has ever seen God; the μονογενής God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.". Here, it cannot be denied, that together with the use of κόλπον, usually translated "bosom", has a special closeness. Indeed, this noun is used to describe, "the closest and most intimate relation to the Father" (Thayer). As I have said, usage has much to do with word meanings.
Yes, I understood your argument, but disagree. And apparently no Lexicon supports the"beloved one"as within the historical range of meanings of monogenes. I thought about your argument and concluded the Hebrews author use monogenes to reflect the "one and only" meaning of H3173.
Flaws found in the NIV
1) Isaiah 12:3 the omission of the conjunction should read, "therefore"
2) Mark 1:41 Jesus was indignant should read, "moved with anger."
3) John 1:16 should read, "...grace after grace."
4) John 21:5 friends should read, "children."
5) Acts of the Apostles 13:50 "leaders" should be italicized to indicate an addition to the text.
6) Romans 3:25 sacrifice of atonement should read, "propitiatory shelter."
7) 1 Corinthians 16:13 "be courageous" should read, "act like men."
8) Ephesians 2:3 deserving of wrath should read, "children of wrath."
9) Colossians 1:28 the omission of "every man" (or every person) reduces the force of the teaching that the gospel is understandable to every person.
10) 2 Thessalonians 2:13 to be saved should read, "for salvation."
11) 2 Thessalonians 3:6 who is idle should read, "who leads an undisciplined life"
12) 1 Timothy 3:16 appeared in the flesh should read, "revealed in the flesh."
13) Titus 3:4 love should read, "love for mankind."
14) Hebrews 10:14 sacrifice should read, "offering."
15) James 2:5 to be rich in faith should read, "yet rich in faith."
16) 1 Peter 4:6 those who are now dead should read, "those who are dead."
17) 1 John 2:2 atoning sacrifice should read, "propitiation."
18) 1 John 4:10 atoning sacrifice should read, "propitiation."
19) Revelation 13:8; 17:8 from the creation should read, "since the foundation." And Matthew 25:34 and Hebrews 4:3 since the creation should read "since the foundation."
20) Revelation 22:21 be with God's people should read, "be with all."
21) 1 Samuel 15:19 the Lord should read "the voice of the Lord."
22) 1 Samuel 15:20 the Lord should read "the voice of the Lord."
23) 1 Samuel 15:22 the Lord should read "the voice of the Lord."
24) Philemon 1:6 the verse should read as follows: "I pray that your participation in the faith may be effective in deepening your understanding of every blessing that belongs to all of you in Christ Jesus."
25) 1 Corinthians 14:29 should read "Let two or three prophets speak, and the others evaluate." The NIV added "carefully" and "what is said."
26) 1 Corinthians 6:19 "your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you" should read "your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit in all of you.
27) Matthew 3:11 should read, ""As for me, I baptize all of you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize some of you with the Holy Spirit and others with fire.
28) Matthew 11:12 should read, ""Since the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of the heavens has been forcefully sought, and forceful people are laying hold of it."
29) 1 Corinthians 2:14 does not say all things that come from the Spirit, therefore the verse should read: The person without the Spirit does not accept some of the things of the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit,
30) Titus 2:11 "Offer" has been added which alters the message, the verse should read: For the grace of God, who provides salvation, has appeared to all people.
31) 1 Corinthians 3:1: Siblings I could not speak to you as people with the Spirit, but as to people without the Spirit, as babes in Christ who have yet to learn from the Spirit.
32) Acts of the Apostles 13:48: When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord and as many as accepted direction to eternal life believed.
33) Revelation 14:3, redeemed should read purchased.
34) 2 Peter 2:4, "hell" should be translated "Tartarus."
35) Romans 12:10, "love" should be translated "sibling love"
36) Acts of the Apostles 28:2, unusual kindness should be "love for humankind."
37) 1 Peter 2:3 should read "kindness of the Lord."
38) Luke 6:4 should read "lawful for Priests alone."
39) Luke 9:18 "praying in private" should read "praying alone"
40) Luke 10:40 "doing the work by myself" should read "doing the work alone."
Examples 1, 9, 13, 21, 22, 23, and 35 document omission of words or parts of words.
Examples 5, 15, 16, 25, 29 and 30 document addition of words.
Examples 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 33, 34, 37, 38, 39 and 40 document replacement of the inspired historical meaning with a different meaning.
Example 24 and 28 documents a translation devoid of meaning, just an array of disconnected phrases.
Example 27 clarifies the confusion produced by the Greek plural "you."
Examples 31 and 32 present an unambiguous correction to the NIV translations.
When translators "add" words or phrases, "omit" words or phrases, or translate words or phrases outside of the historical-grammatical meaning unnecessarily, in order to make doctrine driven choices, they are presenting a flawed translation in my opinion. All translations have flaws, the product of fallible people, but the NIV flaws seem abundant to me.
Lets take a look at how the NIV renders "mono" (G3441) which means "alone" and thus carries the idea of being the only one being discussed. Many times it is rendered correctly as "alone"
Thus in Luke 6:4, where the NIV goes with "lawful only for priests" a more consistent rendering would be "lawful for priests alone."
In Luke 9:18 instead of "praying in private" the NIV should go with "praying alone."
In Luke 10:40 "doing the work by myself" the NIV should go with "doing the work alone."
In Luke 24:12 "strips of linen lying by themselves" should read "linen wrappings alone."
In Luke 24:18 "are you the only one visiting" should read "are you alone visiting."
Acts of the Apostles 11:19, "spreading the word only among Jews" should read "spreading the word to Jews alone."
It is really not that hard to translate word or phrase meanings more consistently than does the NIV. For example in Luke's writings, the NIV goes with alone 3 of the 9 times it translates mono, but the NASB sticks with alone 6 out of the 9 times. On the other hand, I found only one translation (Darby) that went with "alone" all 9 times.
Ground Rules : Hereafter I will cite only eleven translations. They are only 20th and 21 century versions. When it comes to Old Testament passages the Mounce translation will drop out because it only focuses on the N.T.
Van seems to be fixated on the word alone. So I will demonstrate the usages of that particular word in those references above that most translations have the flexibility to use or not use that word. The very same meaning is communicated. The Lord is not bound by Van's edicts.
Luke 6:4
Versions that agree with Van : LEB, NASB, NET, WEB
Versions that don't agree with Van : CSB, CEB,ESV, LEB, MOUNCE, NLT and NRSV
Luke 9:18
Van : ESV, LEB, NASB, NLT, NRSV, WEB
NO Van : CSB, CEB, ISV, MOUNCE,NET
Luke 10:40
Van : CSB, ESV, LEB, NET, WEB.
No Van : CEB, ISV, MOUNCE, NASB, NLT, NRSV
Luke 24:18
Van : 0
No Van : CSB, CEB, ESV, ISV, LEB, MOUNCE, NASB, NET, NLT, NRSV, WEB
Acts 11:19
Van : 0
No Van : CSB, CEB, ESV, ISV, LEB, MOUNCE, NASB, NET, NLT, NRSV, WEB
Tallies
Van : 15 points
Non-Van : 51
the NIV is a paraphrase!
All translations that put Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic into other languages are in fact paraphrases. They are approximations of the original languages.
not all versions use the corrects words in English, not even the KJV.
Not all posters use correct English.
Van is intentionally hiding from me --avoiding giving an answer to a clear and direct question.Van, I had asked in my post #9 where you got your irrational rendering. What is your source, or did you come up with it all alone with no supporting material as you usually do. I must say the wording is most certainly anti-biblical. Don't try to force-feed your aberrant theology into a make believe concoction.